Last week we defined that we all have three types of relationships active in our life right now. You can read part 1 of this post here. Now that we have a working definition to use we can assign value to each category. This is very important, because we have a finite supply of time and energy and each relationship demands both.

As we form a list of relationships in our life let’s exclude family: spouses, children, parents, siblings. Family very much falls into these categories and it is very important to understand the role each member plays.

For this post I want to focus on the relationships that are outside our family. Primarily because these relationships are not permanent. These are the relationships we chose to allow in our lives.

Here is a simple spreadsheet with 15 total slots, 5 per relationship type.

• We receive our DIRECTION, BELIEFS, & OPINIONS from those we allow influence in our life from mentors.
• We receive and give SUPPORT  & ENCOURAGEMENT in our life through peers.
• We have a RESPONSIBILITY to ENCOURAGE & INSTRUCT those coming up behind us in life as mentees.

The ratio I have found most effective is 3:2:5

3 Mentors : 2 Peers : 5 Mentees

Here is the simple reasoning behind why I work to apply a 3:2:5 ratio in my life:

• By limiting the number of mentors to 3 I provide multiple advisors without overwhelming  myself with input.

Jim Rhon states that, “you are the average of the five people you spend the most time with.”

• By Limiting the number of peers to 2 I make sure to limit the potential for unqualified praise and misinformed advice.

Without a different perspective, experience, or success you are just throwing darts blindfolded into a pitch black room.

• By maximizing the number of mentees to 5 I make sure I am actively applying the things I am learning from my mentors and proving alongside my peers.

You will never grow faster than when you begin to help others.

Now we must take this ratio and scale it to real life. Facebook caps you at 500 friends and unlimited subscribers. This is unrealistic. NPR.com did an article titled “Don’t Believe Facebook; You Only Have 150 Friends.” Which focus’s on the research of Robin Dunbar who found “150 to be the sweet spot for hunter-gatherer societies all over the world (1).” The 150 number is the median of the actual research range of 100 – 200 person social circle (2).

I tend to error on the low end and max out my list of friends at 100. I will know more people and have more acquaintances; but it unrealistic to try to remain connected at the level needed with more than 100 people and have intimate relationship with each person.

This means in real life a 3:2:5 ratio could support 100 real meaningful relationships at any one time and look like this:

30 Mentors : 20 Peers : 50 Mentees

Ask these 3 Questions to help bring relational balance and engage your purpose:

1. Which relationship type is most important?
2. Which relationship type should have the most people?
3. Which relationship type is currently over capacity?

(Read part 1 of this post here)